Why did the US colonists oppose the Tea Act?

Answer 1

He wasnt the only one. All 13 colonies hated the Tea Act. The british put a tax on tea and the colonies weren't represented in the british parliment. Taxation without representation. It wasnt fair so all the colonies boycotted british goods. Samuel Adams just encouraged them.

Answer 2

Prior to the French and Indian War, British colonists in America were not taxed. Taxes were introduced, including the tax on tea, because Great Britain saw the war as being for the colonies' benefit as well as the mother country, and they should pay their portion of it. Many colonists objected because they were taxed but still had no representation in Parliament. The Sons of Liberty were the ones who protested the Act as taxation without representation.

Parliament also passed the Townshend Revenue Act of 1767. The average colonist were not upset about the tea tax since the tax on tea was LOWERED and not made higher. The men who were upset were the smugglers of Dutch tea since it made the cost of their tea HIGHER ( Hamlton was one), so they organized the Boston Tea Party. They were hit in their pockets because of this and were pretty mad.

Most of the tea was brought to the colonies by the British East India Company. The British East India Company bought tea in southern Asia, shipped it to the colonies, and then sold it to colonial tea merchants. The merchants then sold the tea to the colonists. To make a profit, the merchants sold the tea at a higher price than they had paid for it.

Tea was especially popular around the time the Tea Act of 1773 came in. This act, requiring that Americans purchase tea through the British East India company, imposed heavy taxes on the tea - taxes that weren't being spent on the improvement of the colonies, but rather on unnecessary British troops and on lining the King's pockets.

Many colonists were opposed to the Tea Act because it cut out middlemen who operated legally while also enforcing more taxes. Those who imported tea illegally were also affected because legal tea prices dropped as a result of the act.

The Tea Act of 1773 gave the British East India Tea Company an advantage over American and Dutch tea Companies. By lowering the company's tea tax, it made it so cheap that other tea companies were unable to compete. Colonists were enraged, especially when a previous tea tax on tea entering the colonies remained intact while tea entering England had no duty.

The Tea Act made it possible for colonists to pay lower taxes on tea than they had, and the British government was hopeful that it would be well received. It was not, partly because people who were already avoiding the existing taxes would have a hard time continuing to do so, and partly because merchants would make less money on the tea under the newer tax. Another problem was that the tax was being used to leverage recognition of the British parliament's right to impose taxes on the colonists.

Answer 3

It's actually a lot more complicated than most people think.

The Tea Act (of 1773; I assume that's the one you're talking about) authorized the British East India Company to ship tea directly to the British colonies in North America AND to export tea from Britain duty-free.

This tea, even with the British taxes included, would still have undercut the price of smuggled tea. So it wasn't an issue simply of money. Instead, there were two factors at work here:

1. Some politically-minded people saw that this was, in effect, a way of making the Townshend Act (which imposed a tax on tea) more palatable, by reducing the overall cost of the tea to the colonists without actually lowering the tax paid by the colonists and since they considered this to be "taxation (by Parliament) without representation (in Parliament)" they resented the implicit reassertion by Parliament that it had the right to tax the colonies; and
   
2. Some other (possibly less politically-minded) people were making large profits by smuggling and selling Dutch tea in the colonies, and did not want to lose this business.
   

The two factions combined forces in opposition to the Tea Act (it may be worth noting that no less a personage than Benjamin Franklin had actually called for more or less what the Tea Act provided: a way for the British East India Company to import tea directly to the colonies without passing through Britain first).

Answer 4

Most weren't upset and the men who were upset were smugglers of tea. They smuggled Dutch tea into the colonies ( Hamlton was one of them) and the tax actually was LOWERED and not made larger. This meant that the Dutch tea was higher in price than the English, so they knew they would loose money because of the tax change. They were the ones who organized the Boston Tea party.

Answer 5

Actually, the " colonist" didn't think that. It was a small group of men who were protecting their own economic interest. The British had LOWERED the tax on tea and this made the price of the tea smuggled into the colonies higher than the British. The smugglers were upset and two of the biggest smugglers in the colonies were Hamilton and Hancock. Hancock was very wealthy and he funded/supported the Son's of Liberty. Without him there would have been no Sam Adams nor the Son's of Liberty, but the whole purpose was to protect his economic interests. The people in the colonies paid LESS taxes than people in England paid.

Answer 6

Because they thought it unjust.